Peer review
The review board
A credential is worth something because of what stands behind it. Before a course can be offered across institutions through the JurisCred Library, it is read by practitioners from member schools and legal-technology organizations.
Practitioners, not a rubber stamp
Reviewers record a position and the reasoning behind it. JurisCred applies those consistently across the Library, so that one credential means what the next one means.
Nobody reviews their own
A reviewer is recused automatically from anything published by an organization they work in. They do not see it, cannot vote on it, and the record shows who was recused and why.
Named, on purpose
Reviewers are listed here by name and organization, because an employer looking at a credential should be able to see whose judgement it rests on.
Listing is not the end of it
Institutions using a listing can report a problem at any time. Anything under question leaves the Library while it is looked into, and nobody part-way through it is interrupted.
Who reviews
The board is being assembled. Until reviewers are seated, JurisCred reviews every submission itself against the same standard, and this page will name them as they join.
If you work in legal technology at a member institution and would consider reviewing, write to support@jurisapps.com.
What a review looks at
- Whether it teaches the thing it claims to. A credential names a capability, and the course has to build it.
- Whether the assessment is worth passing. Exams that test application rather than recall, and that a learner cannot get through without doing the work.
- Whether it duplicates something already listed. Publishers are shown what the Library already holds when they submit, and asked what makes theirs different.
- Whether it is accurate. Legal technology moves; a course that cites a superseded rule or a discontinued product is not fit to credential anyone.